Eagles & YouTube etc

[sodascouts]

VA, I'm not saying it's OK to steal. Besides, you are never going to get an entire CD on YouTube. If you get 1 or 2 songs off an album, that's a lot. All I'm saying is that any musician on YouTube is getting Free World Wide Exposure! That is certainly worth something, isn't it? Many people discover an artist on YouTube, & then continue to support them by going to see a live performance or buying something! I don't know anyone that gets ALL their music from YouTube, the quality is just not as good. As Soda pointed out......Many people have been discovered on YouTube & have gone on to make millions.

Well, truth be told, I have seen many albums on YouTube in their entirety, including albums by our guys. Even I can understand why they wouldn't be cool with that.

However, I think any potential revenue lost by people streaming the album via YouTube is offset by the fact that many people hear songs they like on YouTube and go out and buy the album, or get it off of iTunes. I know I've done this. I ask for friends to recommend songs, then I find them on YouTube to see if I like them enough to buy them.

With the demise of radio, how else are we supposed to hear these songs? I'm not going to buy a $15-$20 album blind, especially if I'm not familiar with the artist (admittedly, it's the new crowd, and not the successful old guard with established fanbases like the Eagles, who benefit the most from YouTube). Also, this way, we can hear deep tracks to help us make our decision whereas in the past, you could only hear the songs that were released to radio.

[Topkat]

I use YouTube to see performances of some of those old bands from the 70's. Guys that are no longer around to see live...Yeah the dead guys!!! We can't see Hendrix or Harrison or Stevie Ray Vaughn....so seeing their stuff on YouTube brings back the memory of them. I even see very young musicians commenting on these videos & recognizing their talent, even though they are long gone. They never had the opportunity to see them live, & never will, so they are discovering great talent from the past & are influenced & inspired by them. I think that's a good thing!

[sodascouts]

Well, I'm going to admit something. When we get to the point where people are putting entire albums on YouTube, it starts to feel wrong to me. I don't think I want to defend that behavior, yet if you take my argument to its logical conclusion, the behavior is justified because it benefits both me and the artist.

Still, it feels wrong, and I usually go with my gut on these things. I'll have to think about the ramifications of that to my argument and modify it accordingly. Now, I gotta go teach a class!

[sodascouts]

OK, after some consideration, I feel I've taken my argument too far and therefore I am going to backtrack. I'm sorry to confuse everyone, but I have to be intellectually honest here.

Should I promote the uploading of commercially available material to YouTube?

I have come to the decision that no, I should not.

While I know very well there is no hard proof that YouTube hurts musicians and there IS hard proof that it has helped some musicians (another one I thought of is Chris Brown), there is a problem here:

There is also no hard proof that the loss of potential revenue from the streaming of commercially available material via YouTube is completely offset by the sales such streaming generates.

Therefore, if an artist does not believe that such an offset occurs, I cannot blame him or her for wanting to take the music down, nor can I in fairness resent it.

Thus, as much as it pains me, I discourage anyone from posting links to commercially available material on The Border unless there are special circumstances (for instance it's OK if the artist does not object to it.) Obviously, I will have to modify my own behavior in this regard, too, and I'm not looking forward to that because I took a great deal of pleasure and pride in making self-produced videos to Eagles songs, but I guess I have to suck it up and deal.


What about non-commercially available material?

My logic does not apply to non-commercially available material such as live, unreleased, and/or out-of-print music. I cannot conceive of any way this has any negative commercial effect at all - and people won't be able to hear it any other way. Therefore, I can in good conscience criticize the artist's decision to have such material taken down as unreasonable and unwise, regardless of whether or not the law is on their side.

In the case of the Eagles, though, I do discourage people from filming them because I don't want them distracted.


Is YouTube destroying the music industry? Should it be legislated/sued out of existence to protect copyright holders?

No, I do not believe YouTube is destroying the music industry - far from it - for reasons I gave in prior posts.

I certainly do not believe that YouTube should be brought down entirely because of potential abuses of copyright that take place on it. Even if one artist doesn't want his/her material on it, others should be allowed to upload theirs if they wish. As I said before, for many, it is a useful way of getting their music "out there."

Plus, YouTube serves other purposes as well, including political ones - which is why oppressive governments like Afghanistan and China (which certainly has no qualms about copyright violation) block it. I don't want America to become a place where the government controls what I watch, no matter how "well-intentioned" such control is.

The artist can take down videos with his or her songs, but trying to take down YouTube entirely is going too far. If that means they have to take some time and trouble to police YouTube themselves, so be it. It's not really that arduous to hire some plebe to do searches on YouTube (like my friend Kendel), and hey, they're helping the economy by creating jobs, lol. More importantly, though, this approach keeps the issue to the entertainer's rights without treading on mine - assuming that no false copyright claims are made.

ETA: Since this discussion has gone beyond concert video, I'm moving the thread.

[Topkat]

Well, I'm going to admit something. When we get to the point where people are putting entire albums on YouTube, it starts to feel wrong to me. I don't think I want to defend that behavior, yet if you take my argument to its logical conclusion, the behavior is justified because it benefits both me and the artist.

Still, it feels wrong, and I usually go with my gut on these things. I'll have to think about the ramifications of that to my argument and modify it accordingly. Now, I gotta go teach a class!

Soda, nobody needs YouTube to copy an entire album, or cd. Many people make a copy from an original right from their computer & there is tons of software out there to make copies of cd's, dvd's or other media. YES, that is all wrong, but that stuff really is a whole other topic. It really doesn't fall under the topic of YouTube.

There are always people that are going to do this, but this has been going on long before YouTube even existed.

[TimothyBFan]

OK, after some consideration, I feel I've taken my argument too far and therefore I am going to backtrack. I'm sorry to confuse everyone, but I have to be intellectually honest here.

In my opinion, you did not take your argument too far and you were right on the mark, for the most part. And to be honest, I'm sorry you felt you had to backtrack. I only hope that you aren't backtracking because you felt you had to. If what you were posting is how you felt, there's no reason to backtrack.

And now I feel I should ask--- should we not be posting fan videos of live performances anymore? Do I have to stop and think every time I see something on YouTube and think to myself, "the Borderers would love this one"? I know how much I look forward to getting on the board after a concert, not only to see our member reviews and pictures but to also see any videos that we find on YouTube. I want to be clear and I don't want to do anything to rock the boat or burden a moderator who feels that they have to take it down.

I've made my opinion more than obvious recently and in the past and I hold to those opinions. I think some of these artists/record companies/etc. have taken this to the extreme and the legislators would do better to work on less petty things.

I also truly believe that YouTube can be a very good way for new artist to get their talents out there and the examples you cited are wonderful incidences of the good that can come from it. As for the established artists who are continuously on the lookout for violators and have their lawyers on speed dial (Metallica, Eagles...)-- come on, is it really taking that much revenue out of your already well lined pockets? Bless the established artist that have embraced it including our very own Timothy & Joe.

[Freypower]

And now I feel I should ask--- should we not be posting fan videos of live performances anymore? Do I have to stop and think every time I see something on YouTube and think to myself, "the Borderers would love this one"? I know how much I look forward to getting on the board after a concert, not only to see our member reviews and pictures but to also see any videos that we find on YouTube. I want to be clear and I don't want to do anything to rock the boat or burden a moderator who feels that they have to take it down.

I already asked that question.

[sodascouts]

I have no problem with people posting links to live videos.

TBF, I didn't feel I had to backtrack because of some kind of external pressure - as I said, it felt wrong to defend uploading songs that were commercially available in light of the fact that some people were uploading entire albums. Therefore, I re-evaluated my position.

[TimothyBFan]

I have no problem with people posting links to live videos.

TBF, I didn't feel I had to backtrack because of some kind of external pressure - as I said, it felt wrong to defend uploading songs that were commercially available in light of the fact that some people were uploading entire albums. Therefore, I re-evaluated my position.

Glad to hear that!! Stay true to your convictions!!!

[sodascouts]

Soda, nobody needs YouTube to copy an entire album, or cd. Many people make a copy from an original right from their computer & there is tons of software out there to make copies of cd's, dvd's or other media. YES, that is all wrong, but that stuff really is a whole other topic. It really doesn't fall under the topic of YouTube.

There are always people that are going to do this, but this has been going on long before YouTube even existed.

You're absolutely right that illegitimate copying existed before YouTube and exists outside of YouTube. Additionally, anyone who believes the destruction of YouTube will magically fix this problem is kidding themselves.

I know of many sites - which I choose not to use - where I can get just about any album I want for free in the form of audio files. No ripping is required. Nobody needs YouTube to make illegal copies. The destruction of Napster didn't destroy P2P - it just went underground. The best P2P sites aren't even crawled by external search engines, which is why the idea of search engine control as a means to stop piracy is laughable... but that's another matter.

At any rate, it is undeniable that this problem also takes place on YouTube. The reality is that entire albums are indeed uploaded and so it's relevant to the discussion as part of the overall YouTube issue - and it's the part that many artists are most concerned by.